John Skidmore doesn’t care about 3-D TV. Should you?

In early January, Skidmore, a 24-year-old from Chicago, bought two Panasonic plasma TVs for a total of $2,700, knowing full well that he would own those TVs for years to come, even after hearing the news from the recent Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas that 3-D TV was just around the corner.

He didn’t think that the new 3-D sets, scheduled to arrive in stores in the next few months, were worth the premium he would pay for something that he expected to use rarely.

“I couldn’t see myself wearing 3-D glasses every time I watched anything on TV,” he said.

As with most technological advances, the hype seems to have taken over the conversation when it comes to 3-D TV technologies. Thus far, consumers like Mr. Skidmore aren’t waiting for new and better 3-D sets to come along and instead are going for deals found online and at big retailers like Best Buy and Wal-Mart.

But when 3-D TVs do become available in the next few months, should you invest in one? Let’s look at some of the common questions most consumers have when it comes to viewing in three dimensions.

Do I still have to use those dumb blue-and-red glasses?

No. Those glasses are used in something called anaglyphic 3-D. They use two colors — red and blue (sometimes green) — to create two different “views” of an image. Popular in the 1950s and 1960s, they are going the way of the dodo. Now you have to use newer, sleeker dumb glasses.

Can I just keep the glasses I used when I watched “Avatar” and “Up” in the theater?

Technically you should be able to — those are passive 3-D glasses and they use a system of polarization that splits the image on screen into two separate images. This is fine for a large room when everyone is seated in front of the screen. But 3-D TV manufacturers can’t tell what your room will look like and, more important, don’t want to sell 3-D glasses for a few pennies when they can sell fancier “active” glasses for $70.

Active? What’s so special?

Active glasses allow light to reach only one eye at a time. As you watch the video, the display shows one side of the image, then the other in rapid succession. The glasses sync up with the image, alternately darkening over one eye. In this way, the display presents a different perspective for each eye. This also allows you to walk around the room and still get a fairly good 3-D effect.

The glasses flash? Are they electronic? That means you have to charge them, right?

Yes. As if there weren’t enough wires in your family room.

So how cool is it, really? Be honest.

Set makers from Sony to Philips in their various showrooms are sure to bombard you with pitches to check out their 3-D TVs. Arguably, seeing an “Avatar” trailer on a 3-D TV will be cool the first time, but the bloom goes off the rose quickly. With the right content, it’s great, but it’s doubtful many will be excited by “My Dinner With Andre” in 3-D.

Can they make 2-D movies into 3-D movies?

They can, but see above. To turn a 2-D movie into 3-D, artists have to trace the outline of the various layers in the film. For example, a character moving in front of a stand of trees would have to be “popped out” from the background and a computer would then generate a 3-D image by interpolating the very small amount of background that should appear “behind” the character.

The assumption is that future action movies will almost all be filmed in 3-D, and companies like Imax are already planning camcorders with two lenses (required for 3-D recording) for home use. (NYT)